Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Donkey's Inn -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (3189)	3/9/2002 7:31:49 AM
From: zonkie	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 15516

Well this ought to scare these countries into submission. Or at least that's what a president might think if he had an IQ of about 91. I would expect heads to roll over this story no matter whether it is true or false. The person who leaked it or the person who made it up should be in big trouble. Unless of course the administration thinks that just denying it will make it go away, which is what someone with an IQ of 91 might think.. _________ U.S. Military Told to Prepare Nuclear Weapons: LA Times March 09, 2002 05:25 AM ET WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Citing a classified Pentagon report, the Los Angeles Times reported on Saturday that The Bush administration has told the Defense Department to prepare, on a contingency basis, plans to use nuclear weapons against at least seven countries. The military was also directed to build smaller nuclear weapons for use in certain battlefield situations, the newspaper reported. The countries named in the secret report -- provided to Congress on Jan. 8 -- were China, Russia, Iraq, North Korea, Iran, Libya and Syria, the Times reported. The three contingencies listed for possible use of the weapons were "against targets able to withstand nonnuclear attack; in retaliation for attack with nuclear, biological or chemical weapons; or "in the event of surprising military developments," according to the newspaper. "The report says the Pentagon should be prepared to use nuclear weapons in an Arab-Israeli conflict, in a war between China and Taiwan, or in an attack from North Korea on the south. They might also become necessary in an attack by Iraq on Israel or another neighbor," The Times said. "Officials have long acknowledged that they had detailed nuclear plans for an attack on Russia. However, this "Nuclear Posture Review" apparently marks the first time that an official list of potential target countries has come to light," analysts told the Times. "This is dynamite," said Joseph Cirincione, a nuclear arms expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington. "I can imagine what these countries are going to be saying at the U.N.," he told the newspaper. Arms control advocates told the Times "the report's directives on development of smaller nuclear weapons could signal that the Bush administration is more willing to overlook a long-standing taboo against the use of nuclear weapons except as a last resort. However, conservative analysts said that the Pentagon must prepare for all possibilities as other countries, and some terrorist groups, are engaged in weapons development programs. Their position was that smaller weapons have a deterrent role because rogue nations or terrorists might not believe that the United States would use more destructive multi-kiloton weapons, the Times reported. Jack Spencer, a defense analyst at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, told the newspaper the contents of the report did not surprise him and represent "the right way to develop a nuclear posture for a post-Cold War world." The Times reported that a copy of the report was obtained by defense analyst and Times contributor William Arkin. The Pentagon refused to comment. reuters.com

To: TigerPaw who wrote (3189)	3/10/2002 11:02:35 PM
From: Mephisto	Respond to of 15516

How the Clinton Administration and the Democrats Tried to Prevent the Enron Disaster from Happening democrats.com Stopping Auditor-Consulting Conflicts by Accountants 2000: Clinton Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Arthur Levitt proposes regulations to prohibit accounting firms from simultaneously serving as consultants and auditors. Anderson and other accounting firms marshall a massive lobbying campaign against the Clinton-Levitt regs, killing them. The lead lobbyist for the accounting firms is Harvey Pitt. After being sworn in as President, Bush makes Pitt chair of the SEC. · Greater Disclosure of Derivatives 1997: Clinton Commodities Futures Trading Commission Chair Brooksley Born proposes greater regulation (by way of more stringent disclosure) of derivatives. Her proposal is beaten back by House Republicans, including then-House Banking Committee Chair Jim Leach (R-IA) who scolded her for two hours at a hearing; · CFTC Oversight of Energy Traders 2000: William Rainier, Born's successor as chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, told Congress he was "deeply concerned" about a bill to exempt energy trading from CFTC review, noting that those who trade energy derivatives were not subject to any other oversight. Rainer's objections were largely ignored by the Republican-controlled Congress, and the exemption, heavily backed by Enron, became law; · Cracking Down on Tax Havens 2000: Clinton Treasury Secretary Larry Summers proposes a crackdown on tax havens such as those used by Enron. With the US co-chairing the OECD's Forum on Harmful Tax Practices, Summers crusades for a crackdown on money-laundering and tax havens. His proposal is opposed by the GOP Congress. When the Bush Administration takes office, Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill abandons Summers' crusade, telling the Wall Street Journal, "The government has not been respectful of the cost it imposes on society." The New York Times reports that Bush's top economic adviser, Lawrence Lindsey (a former economic adviser to Enron) also opposed efforts to crack down on tax havens. · Protecting 401(k)s 1997: Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) proposes banning investment of more than 10 percent of the total 401(k) plan in the employer's stock--the maximum that investment experts recommend a person sink into any company. The GOP Senate waters-down her bill so much it no longer applies to any corporation in America; · Protecting Investors and Shareholders On December 20, 1995, President Clinton vetoed the Public Securities Litigation Reform Act, which would have restricted lawsuits against corporation accused of securities fraud. In his veto message, Clinton presciently noted that while he supported the notion of reducing frivolous lawsuits: "I am not, however, willing to sign legislation that will have the effect of closing the courthouse door on investors who have legitimate claims. Those who are the victims of fraud should have recourse in our courts.…our markets are as strong and effective as they are because they operate -- and are seen to operate -- with integrity. I believe that this bill, as modified in conference, could erode this crucial basis of our markets' strength." The GOP Congress overrode Clinton's veto.